Yes, they care about what they don't know.

The intelligence of a philosopher is vastly different from that of a scientist. A scientist seeks to know things for their value to anything related to human benefit or progress. A philosopher is involved in much more abstract thinking, often about things that do not admit of a reachable answer, and yet they still pursue it. A scientist will never answer the question "what is the meaning of life" and probably neither will a philosopher, but the philosopher will still try.

Philosophy is for everyone, science is for the 'elite'

Philosophers make us think, science just tells us things... And even the things they tell us might be wrong. Whilst science tries to answer "How was the world created?", philosophers answer, "What is the purpose of life?", giving us more meaning. Scientists are less creative, they need an EXACT answer, whilst philosophers are always pondering more...

They kept it simple.

Philosophers asked who is man? He looked into himself and found the answer. Scientists asked what is world? Scientists made this world more complicated and still haven't found the answer. Scientists failed to prove the purpose of life. So, philosophers are considerably smarter than scientists. Instead of living a simple and peaceful life, man made it simply too complicated.

Philosophers focus their intellect on much more complex information than scientists.

Philosophers attempt to explain every aspect of life's toughest questions whereas most scientists simply work on subjects with simple, clear-cut answers. Almost anyone can perform science through equations and the scientific method, but it takes someone with special intelligence to become a true philosopher. Philosophers practice deep thought and intense meditation, scientists deal mostly with surface-level questions.

Philosophers Invented Science and Formalized Logic!

Philosophers are trained to defend a thesis with a priori reasoning and argument, whereas scientists simply fallback on the empirical evidence and uncritically assume the scientific method. Philosophers are engaged in the most abstract of topics, while most scientists contend themselves with the concrete and openly visible. Scientists and mathematicians adopt the rules of logic (branch of philosophy) in their investigations, and their work would be impossible without it.

Not only are philosophers well-versed in syllogism, but they are naturally more sensitive to words and their meaning, which has consequently resulted in top GRE scores in verbal/writing sections out of all the majors. STEM courses are insufficient to development of critical thinking skills in schools because its emphasis is on quantitative analysis, not verbal reasoning.

Scientists constrain themselves

Scientists have the potential to equal the mental expansiveness of the philosopher, but can never achieve it while remaining chained to the physical world alone. To quote from another observer: "Every scientist should be also a philosopher, because philosophers raise questions and great scientists are those who raise really big questions."

Scientists constrain themselves

Scientists have the potential to equal the mental expansiveness of the philosopher, but can never achieve it while remaining chained to the physical world alone. To quote from another observer: "Every scientist should be also a philosopher, because philosophers raise questions and great scientists are those who raise really big questions."

Philosophers are more intelligent

Philosophers actually think before they say anything. Unlike someone as well-known and smart as hawking who says the universe can and will create itself out of nothing. How can the universe create itself when that implies it would have had to precede itself in being which is absurd. It takes a philosopher to reason well about things that scientists "discover".

Philosophers are more intelligent

Philosophers actually think before they say something, whereas someone like Hawking comes and says The universe can and will create itself out of nothing (just so they avoid having to put in a god even though his explanation is contradictory. How the fuck can he universe create itself? To do that the universe would have to exist before it existed which is impossible. See, i used philosophy and logic to figure that out.

Philosophers (generally) are smarter than scientists

It first of all depends on what we mean by "smarter than", what exactly is it that makes someone smarter than someone else? (i will leave you to think for yourself regarding that particular question). But on the whole, whereas scientists are concerned with things that they really have no idea concerning their nature, philosophers try and figure out exactly what makes up the nature of reality: So while newton (as legend has it, but is probably not true), by watching some apples fall, concluded that therefore there is a law of gravity, someone like Hume comes along and pulls the rug from beneath that notion, before others like Kant came along and aruged for ideas like causality and really transformed our understanding of the nature of the external world. Science without philosophy is like not knowing what the hell your talking about. Philosophy is the excercise of clear reasoning which is fundamental to all areas of study including physics, maths, biology, politics, economics, logic, etc. There is a philosophical component to every area of human enquiry, unlike physics for instance which just gives knowledge of appearances, philosophy concerned with almost everything you can think of.

This is not true and is true

Not All Philosphers are smarter than scientists and not all scientist are smarter than philosophers.I'm saying no because this is basically saying all philosophers are smarter than scientists and therefore it's not true.Some Scientists today are more intelligent than philosophers this is true because they have made great and beneficial discoveries that runs soceity today like the ipad.

Don't think so.

I don't feel that either is necessarily smarter than the other. Although I can say that there are so many great scientists in history, it's harder to quantify philosophy. Each study has contributed a lot to society, perhaps science is much more useful than philosophy, but that's doesn't make them smarter.

Scientists are Smarter

Philosophers sit and think about how they think the world ought to be. They make claims and string logical arguments together. They don't learn concrete facts, engage in high-level scientific research, or read academic journals to understand arcane scientific concepts. Scientists create technology and improve life while philosophers argue whether its morally acceptable to do so.

No they are not.

Scientists use existing formulas that they learned from their collective knowledge, Philosophers have to constantly create these "formulas" on the go, which in my opinion is a much more difficult task. There is an equation to describe motion, to describe energy, to describe a chemical reaction. There is no formula to describe interaction between us and the world. There is no formula to explain things that can't be explained or proved. There is no formula for life. It's the philosophers job to be constantly inventing these new laws, propositions and formulas to apply to things that can't be measured mathematically. And Math in itself is very restrictive.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

True philosophers and scientists know that the two are deeply intertwined - for example, many of the greatest scientists were also philosophers; many of the greatest philosophers were also scientists (Aristotle, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, etc). Both schools of thought are bound by genuine curiosity and a desire for knowledge. The general public tend to assume that all scientists are empiricists, but as a theoretical evolutionary biologist I firmly believe that all true scientists are also philosophers in some way.